Conclusion

Abstract

Guyana, Fiji, and Trinidad and Tobago were selected because they have small populations, are multiethnic developing societies with two dominant ethnic groups competing for political power and social recognition. These are all societies where ethnicity is salient in politics; where the population lives under relatively moderate ethnic violence or threat of violence; and where there seems to be a genuine reluctance to share political power. They are also interesting because of the differences in their level of economic development, social cohesion, and histories of democratic governance. Trinidad’s two dominant ethnic groups (both immigrant populations) are seemingly more socially and culturally integrated than the other two cases, and the economy is more developed. Trinidad’s democracy has been challenged twice (first by a Black Power movement in the 1970s and then by a militant Black Muslim group in 1990), but neither attempt was for the purpose of ousting one ethnic leader to be replaced by another; the government does not have a history of overtly repressing any ethnic group to make such an event likely.